You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Can Inpatient Hospital Experiences Predict Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0061097 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel M. Saman, Kevin T. Kavanagh, Brian Johnson, M. Nawal Lutfiyya |
| Abstract |
Factors that increase the risk of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are not fully understood. Recently, Hospital Compare began compiling data from hospital-required reporting to the CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network on CLABSIs in intensive care units (ICUs), at over 4,000 Medicare-certified hospitals in the United States, and made this data accessible on a central website. Also available on the same website are results from the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems survey of patients' hospital experiences. Utilizing both databases, our objective was to determine whether patients' hospital experiences were significantly associated with increased risk for reported ICU CLABSI. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 55% |
| Scientists | 6 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 18% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 47 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 29% |
| Unknown | 9 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 29% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 8% |
| Psychology | 2 | 4% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2013.
All research outputs
#2,140,669
of 24,230,934 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#26,772
of 208,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,637
of 203,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#625
of 5,282 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,230,934 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 208,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 203,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,282 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.